Time magazine has chosen Obama as their Person of the Year. Woot! Great choice, eh?!
*****
I am MUCH less enthusiastic about Obama choosing mega church pastor Rick Warren to give the inaugural invocation. Must be a political move, eh? Go figure. The two men couldn't be more different in their ideology.
David Brody over at CBN had this to say:
David Brody over at CBN had this to say:
Even though Warren and Obama disagree on the life issue, they do see eye to eye on many social justice issues. This move is also classic Obama because it is a signal to religious conservatives that he’s willing to bring in both sides to the faith discussion in this country. Obama has never shied away from that.
Okay. Well, I hold a DIM view of Warren, and here's why (excerpt is from a Beliefnet interview between Waldman and Warren, 4min, here) :
Warren dodged Waldman's question about whether he supported civil unions or domestic partnerships, answering instead, "I support full equal rights for everyone in America," adding that he only opposes a "redefinition" of marriage. He went on to say he's opposed to gay marriage the same way he is opposed to a brother and sister marrying (that would be incest), a man marrying a child (that would be statutory rape), or someone having multiple spouses (that would be polygamy). Pressed by Waldman, Warren said he considered those crimes equivalent to gay marriage.
Anyone that doesn't SEE the problem has his/her head... Oh, nevermind. You know what I am thinking.
In fact, the more I think about this, the more it really upsets me. Why not bring in the 700 Club and Robertson and let them spew? Does Warren's slick presentation CHANGE the facts of these folks? No.... it doesn't.
And, BTW, in the video note Warren's "5000 year" error. Did you catch it?
Geeeez.
On the other hand, this is a see God moment. Obama seems to truly have a means to forgiveness that has certainly passed me by. He does so well with forgiveness and reconciliation. From a Christian perspective, he is far the better of we two.
I'm working on it, but I have to get this civil rights chip off my shoulder first. Oh wait. That's not a chip! It's that bright, bright anti-theocratic line!
Now think about this: How are we supposed to view this, both as believers and not, when among us are both lgbt Christians and not? Am I supposed to lighten up on Warren? Am I supposed to downplay the absolute absurdity of this, a man of justice having a man of injustice give an invocation? How in the world am I supposed to think about this?
And for God's sake, are Christians the only people that matter under our laws?
In fact, the more I think about this, the more it really upsets me. Why not bring in the 700 Club and Robertson and let them spew? Does Warren's slick presentation CHANGE the facts of these folks? No.... it doesn't.
And, BTW, in the video note Warren's "5000 year" error. Did you catch it?
Geeeez.
On the other hand, this is a see God moment. Obama seems to truly have a means to forgiveness that has certainly passed me by. He does so well with forgiveness and reconciliation. From a Christian perspective, he is far the better of we two.
I'm working on it, but I have to get this civil rights chip off my shoulder first. Oh wait. That's not a chip! It's that bright, bright anti-theocratic line!
Now think about this: How are we supposed to view this, both as believers and not, when among us are both lgbt Christians and not? Am I supposed to lighten up on Warren? Am I supposed to downplay the absolute absurdity of this, a man of justice having a man of injustice give an invocation? How in the world am I supposed to think about this?
And for God's sake, are Christians the only people that matter under our laws?
Of course, Andrew Sullivan at the Atlantic had this to say:
He won't be as bad as the Clintons (who, among leading Democrats, could?), but pandering to Christianists at his inauguration is a depressing omen.
Depressing, indeed.
Posts
|